1. Because if I can prove it is, maybe some one will take pity on me and send me some Papst-bier.
2. Because the only evidence in favor of a higher drinking age is that, upon moving the drinking age to 21, there were less alcohol-related crashes for the age group 18-20. Sweet, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and guess what else? If the drinking age was moved to 25, there’d be less alcohol-related crashes for the age group 18-24! And if you banned knives, there would be — wait for it — less knife-related accidents! If you banned doughnuts — wait for it — you’d be a jerk! All of which leads me to numero fathreezy:
3. “The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog.” -G.K. Chesterton.
The point being yes, less people of a certain age group died when we raised the drinking age, but only because we took away their freedom. If a man isn’t free to screw up, he’s not free at all.
4. Because the government only raised the drinking age out of anti-Catholic sentiment. We’re not stupid. As far as I can tell — and I’ve performed extensive studies on the subject — Catholics enjoy only three American pastimes: Drinking, Stephen Colbert and procreation. They’ve limited one. Stephen’s next, isn’t he?
And here’s the truly bizarre thing: Only 31 states allow a religious exemption for alcohol consumption. So if you’re not currently shacked up in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, or Wyoming, and you are under 21, you are breaking the law every time you receive the blood of Christ. Which, to be honest, is pretty badass.
But don’t worry, tell them you were only breaking the law in accidence, not in substance.
“Give beer to those who are perishing,
wine to those who are in anguish;
let them drink and forget their poverty
and remember their misery no more.” Proverbs 31:6
Our current drinking philosophy manages the incredible trick of annoying everyone except Southern Baptists.
6. Because the whole reason we have a 21+ drinking age is — surprise, surprise — federal blackmail. The Federal Aid Highway Act stipulates that a state that does not enforce the minimum age of 21 receives a 10% decrease in its annual federal highway apportionment. Who needs to pay attention to state’s rights when you’ve got all the tax money? Necessary and proper my arse.
7. And this is really the issue. Because the drinking age is so ridiculously high, there is scarcely any distinguishing between drinking and drunkenness. If you don’t learn to drink with your meal, how are you expected to drink moderately at a bar? If alcohol is illegal to 18 year olds, how is there an expectation that it will be treated as anything but an illegal substance, and thus abused? Why do you think the most popular beers in America are objectively crappy light beers? I’ll tell you this, it’s not because waiting until 21 to buy beer has made us classy and mature drinkers. I propose, with the commentor who suggested it for me, civil disobedience.